Movie Critic - Tyson

It could be argued that Mike Tyson has been one of the most controversial athletes of the last 20 years, if not all time. James Toback explores the life of the troubled Heavyweight in the documentary Tyson. Shot using mostly footage of what appears to be a series of interviews with Mike Tyson, we explore the world of Mike, from his beginning to what he's been up to since leaving boxing in 2005.
In my review of the film Sugar I describe how rare it was for me to enjoy a sports movie, if only because my standards are so high. One of the aspects of sports cinema that has been drastically missing are compelling characters. As I mentioned earlier it just seems easier for directors and writers to fall back on old stereotypes of athletes, play Thunderstruck 18 times and use quick cuts to distract people rather than write interesting characters that people might actually care about. But I never mentioned how much I truly enjoy sports documentaries. With documentaries you get a whole new perspective. You don't have to worry about fabricating characters because they've already got a rich enough story to put to film, and because it's usually the actual humans in interviews you already have that connection that you might not get with actors. This is exactly what happens in Tyson. Instead of having some actor fall into a caricature of the Champ, you have the actual man telling you some of the more painful memories of his past. Whether it's bullies in the Bronx roughing him up for his lunch money, or talking about his hero and mentor Cus D'Amato - you can see real emotions in someone who you would have never imagined. One of the more compelling aspects of this documentary is Toback's shots of Tyson during the more emotional times, he never lets the camera stray too far away from his eyes, letting you see the pain that Tyson has.
Another great aspect of the documentary is the use of fight footage. Hearing him talk about these epic bouts while watching fights from my childhood was an indescribable sensation. It was like getting directors commentary on your earliest and fondest sports memories. I remember watching a taped version of the Michael Spinks fight, I vaguely remember being at a party and a shocked crowd as Buster Douglas knocked out Mike Tyson. But I'm talking more the mid-90's fights, right when many people my age are just coming into their sports conscious. The two Holyfield fights and Lennox Lewis - we all know how those ended, but it's just a perspective of the fight you never imagined you would get.
I've read reviews that have argued that there's an agenda to this film. James Toback is a friend of Tyson's and it has been criticized for it's portrayal of such a controversial figure. The film shows Mike Tyson - alleged spousal abuser and convicted rapist, but also shows Mike Tyson - complex human being and proud father. Mike Tyson will never stop being a polarizing figure, but love him or hate him, after watching Tyson you will never look at him the same way again. Tyson is rated R for language including sexual references and gets a 4/5 Stars.

Movie Critic - Sugar

It’s been a while folks, and I apologize. But seeing as I no longer have a job I figured I can put a serious dent in my Netflix queue and get back to blogging (or at least I say that but it’ll probably be another month before I write again). Anywho, I’m here to review the film Sugar. In 2007 writing/directing team Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck showed they know one thing, characters. And because of that ma boy the Baby Goose Ryan Gosling got an Oscar nod in their film Full Nelson. Now their focus is on a young Dominican arm Miguel ‘Sugar’ Santos and his young baseball career in the Minor Leagues.
Now I’ll be the first to admit – I’m extremely hard on sports movies. It seems that people just love bad sports movies… there have been plenty. I understand not every sports movie hitting the multiplex can be a Hoosiers, Bull Durham, Tin Cup, or Raging Bull – but have some standards people. I hate when people talk about sports movies and bring up Coach Carter (essentially someone took the Hoosiers script and then made it shitty), Remember the Titans (sensationalizing racism… plus the pretty boy QB is pancaking linebackers), or The Replacements (woof… enough said). I get giddy like a school girl every time a new sports movie comes out that I can actually stand – and folks not only could I stand this one, it was down right fantastic. One of the things that many of the aforementioned great sports movies have is great characters. Not just transparent stereotypes of athletes, they all have legitimate and developed characters. The other thing a great sports movie has is realistic sports action, which Sugar has in spades. There’s not a miss step in any of the baseball action, all of feels real and is filmed perfectly.
One of the more impressive things in this film is the performance of first timer Algenis Perez Soto. According to his imdb page this is his first time out of the gate and I doubt anyone would be able to tell. He plays the character perfectly, there’s not a false note in this performance – whether it’s him pitching, struggling with his English, or having fun with friends. There seems to be a natural sincerity to the character.
Another impressive aspect to Sugar is Boden and Fleck’s direction. From being shot on what seems to be a shoe string budget Sugar moves beautifully from the slums of the Dominican Republic to the farm fields of Iowa to the metropolitan of New York City while never losing its message or purpose. The other thing that impressed me is that it’s apparent that the two are either huge baseball fans or have done a lot of research on Minor League Baseball and the men who pass through it at some point. The authenticity of the movie is shocking for such a small film.
One of the things that made this such a special sports film is that there were many layers. You could look at this as a baseball movie, an immigrant story, or a combination of the two. The performances are strong enough to carry some of the slower moments and make it genuinely believable. Whether Sugar makes it or not is not the main story, his development as a man is what really matters – and the filmmakers make sure it’s not some cheap payoff. Not only is this one of the better sports movies I've seen in a while, it's also one of the better films of 2009. Sugar is 120 minutes long and (for some reason) is Rated R for language, some sexuality and brief drug use – and gets 4/5 Stars.

Movie Critic - Let the Right One In

I’m a sucker for good horror films… although I really haven’t had much to be a sucker for lately. Really other than 2005’s The Descent every other horror movie to come down the pike is some hack writer or director’s ‘re-imagining’ or just right out stealing ideas from 20 years ago. Now we have Tomas Alfredson’s Let the Right One In, a story about a young bullied 12-year old named Oskar who meets a strange new girl named Eli. Now I’m not telling you anything outside of school here when I say that Eli has a bit of a secret – she’s a vampire.
Many times with foreign horror movies a lot is lost in translation – especially seeing as there were possible problems with dubbing on the Blu-Ray version of this film (luckily I prefer subtitles). This is not the case with this Swedish gem. Every scene is eerie and unsettling, even if it’s just two children talking in a courtyard. This suspense and horror is really based around the same idea as the Vampire classic 1922’s Nosferatu, using suspense and atmosphere so at the end of the day you’ll never really jump out of your seat… but when you turn out the lights you might check your closet and under your bed. There’s also added suspense because the child actors are just so good and so God damned creepy. Many times when child actors are involved there are a few really dramatic scenes that they screw up because they don’t have the chops, and make you sit back and go, ‘Ugh… remember the good old days when these kids would’ve been working in the mines for 3 years already?’ But that’s not the case with Let the Right One In, in fact Kare Hedebrant (Oskar) and Lina Leeandersson (Eli) shine in their roles.
Let the Right One In stares at Twilight fans and says, ‘I see your abstinence message ridden tweeny horse shit, and raise you a 12-year old girl tearing through grown men like a hungry wolf… oh and we have people on fire’. For everyone who’s not an idiot and wants a legitimate love story that happens to involve vampires, please don’t support Twilight and use your Netflix or Blockbuster to see this great film. The atmosphere, the acting, the suspense, everything about this film is top notch. If it wasn’t for a few scenes (particularly one near the end) this would be an almost perfect horror movie.
Let the Right One In is rated R for some bloody violence including disturbing images, brief nudity and language, and gets a 4 out of 5 Stars.

Movie Critic - Star Trek

I’ll say it – I’m a Star Wars guy. Even though I’ve seen eight of the previous ten Star Trek movies I could just never get into it like many people have… i.e. Trekkies. None of those eight really compared to the three original Star Wars movies (plus let’s be honest, does anyone really consider the prequels real Star Wars movies?). I have to be honest, I was surprised when I heard they were making this film, Star Trek really has exhausted much of the possibilities it could’ve – with several television series and ten movies, I mean, what could be new? I guess I was wrong. This prequel shows how the Starship Enterprise came to be as we know it from the original Star Trek.
I’m going to start with the thing that first jumped out at me in this movie – the special effects. They are top notch, with many movies like this there will be at least a few times where I think to myself, ‘Oh, come on… ‘. I can honestly say I bought every minute of this film. Whether it was just simple shots of inside the ship or three men parachuting through space, I really can’t say enough about how great this film looks. Most of this is probably due to J.J. Abrams hitting another one out of the park.
Abrams (who might be Mark Attanasio’s doppelganger) has a pretty legit track record – Alias, LOST, and Mission: Impossible III. Now sure, M:I III is a lot like that hot chick you let cheat off you in high school (looks great, but nothing really on the inside) but it’s still a nice resume, and Star Trek just ads to it. He gives the feeling that you actually are in these different worlds whether it’s Vulcan, or Iowa in the future, or on the Starship Enterprise. This also helps when you have a believable cast.
There is not a poor performance in this movie… which is impressive seeing as Tyler Perry is in it. I have to admit, for a cast of mostly unknowns they really do a great job here. One of the better performances is from Chris Pines as James T. Kirk. It would’ve been easy for Pines to just slip into a cartoon of such an iconic and outlandish character, but he takes it and makes it his own. There’s also great work in here from Zachary Quinto, Eric Bana, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, John Cho and Bruce Greenwood, as well as the always great Simon Pegg. Also a nice (and not cheap) cameo by Leonard Nimoy, who still looks great for 78.
This movie is really being advertised slightly wrong. Even though it is an effects driven ‘Summer Event’ movie, this is really more of a character driven film. One of the most important things this movie does is appeal to almost every type of movie goers. It makes references to the classic movies (the random guy in Red always dying, Bones saying, ‘damnit Jim I’m a doctor not a physicist’, and Scotty’s classic, ‘I’m giving it all she’s got Captain) pleasing the nerds who will dress up in their Enterprise gear. It will also please casual fans as well (and maybe most importantly) a person who has never seen a Star Trek movie. It’s easy to look past some of the minor shortfalls of this movie, when everything else seems to work… and is so damn entertaining. I'll say it, I loved this movie, move over Wrath of Kahn, there’s a new leader in the Star Trek clubhouse.
Star Trek is rated PG-13 for sci-fi action and violence, and brief sexual content, and gets 4 out of 5 Stars.

Movie Critic - Observe and Report

The story of Observe and Report is almost hard to explain... if only because it's all over the place. Seth Rogen plays Ronnie Barnardt, a mall rent-a-cop who believes he's in charge of protecting the mall at all costs. When a streaker and string of robberies hit the mall Ronnie springs into action, while actual cops (played by Ray Liotta) actually try and solve the crime. Add in Ronnie's attempt to become a legitimate cop and his borderline obsession with the blonde at the make-up counter Brandi (played by Anna Faris) makes this a jam packed 86 minutes.
Some of the problems in this movie is that it mixes fairly smart and dark humor with a lot of sophomoric jokes made for idiots. This was proven perfectly with the group of about 12 High School kids in the screening I saw who treated Seth Rogen and Aziz Ansari yelling 'Fuck You' back and forth like it was whit on par with Woody Allen. Once it got back to no dick and fart jokes the pricks continued to talk and be obnoxious the entire movie... it really has nothing to do with my review, I just cannot fucking stand when people do that.
But I digress... to the question that I thought about all movie - when did Anna Faris get hot? I remember during the Scary Movie series I could not stand her... it could be because she was staring in such hacky trash, but she didn't seem all that attractive or funny. Now she really hasn't done that many great movies since (sans Brokeback Mountain) but in interviews she's actually been fairly funny and is actually fairly hot now - so I can let it slide. She steals several scenes, and is actually pretty good in this role. Most of the supporting cast is good though including Michael Pena in a change of pace for him, and Danny McBride with a great quick cameo.
But performances aside this movie is an absolute hot mess, there is no way around it. Director Jody Hill takes us all over the place with no real purpose until the last half or so. The most frustrating part about Hill's direction is that he's proven he's competent with good material, Foot Fist Way is extremely underrated and he's directed several episodes of HBO's fantastic comedy Eastbound and Down. But the tone jumps all over the place - but then again, it could also be because it seems he's trying to make Paul Blart: Mall Cop meets Taxi Driver.

Even with my qualms with the pacing and tone, this movie is damn funny. And as much as the first half drags and meanders, the second half is enjoyable and down right hilarious. Seth Rogen plays a different role in this, instead of the lovable loser, he plays the awkward and borderline likable loser. He hits most the right notes, and as I said earlier, if it weren't for the last half (especially the last 15-20 minutes) this movie would be an absolute train wreck.
Observe and Report has a running time of 86 minutes, and is Rated R for pervasive language, graphic nudity, drug use, sexual content and violence.
All over the place, but still funny - Observe and Report squeaks by with 3 out of 5 Stars.

Movie Critic - Death Race

This is a movie that is based off 1975's Death Race 2000, which is a movie that is exactly what it sounds. A race across the country in which David Carradine and Sly basically drive fast cars with guns and hit Old People and Women with them. Needless to say, it's fairly badass in that bad 70's movie sense. This takes a slightly different premise, the year is 2012 and the American Economy has failed completely (foreshadowing?) so prisons - now run by giant corporations - organize Death Races and air them to make money. As in every futuristic movie like this, naturally America eats it up, but gets bored so they have to keep making it more and more ridiculous.
Directed by Paul W.S. Anderson (hack) he once again sloppily throws a camera in random places and catches actors saying lines. Just like his style there are extreme close ups to the action and shaky camera work to 'add intesity', when in reality he's making up for his extremely shotty directing skills. Sharing the same name as Paul Thomas Anderson is a travesty, comparing Paul W.S. Anderson to PTA is like comparing Earvin 'Magic' Johnson to the Ervin Johnson who played for the Bucks. And once again PWSA fails to deliver as a director.
As for the star - Stath... it's safe to say he yet again mails this one in. Jason Statham plays the same character he's beeing playing since being cast in The Transporter (1-3), Crank, and what promises to be awful Crank: High Voltage. The worst part is... it's working for him, he's not bad in this, the border line retarded hardass is exactly what is needed for this role. As for the rest Ian McShane is actually pretty decent and Tyrese adds absolutely nothing while still not being too bad.
So here goes, I actually enjoyed this movie. Once again, playing on the 'movies so bad, they're good', it actually works. Although the premise of Death Race 2000 compared to this Death Race is much, much better, this works too. Never leaving the prison really gives it a confined scope to the movie that actually works. I'm going to be honest, it's nothing more than car racing and extreme violence... and sometimes that's really all you need.
Death Race is Rated R for Strong Language and Violence, and has a running time of 111 Minutes.
Death Race gets (as weird as it feels to say) a 3/5 Stars

Movie Critic: The Reader

Let's go through the things that make the Academy Super Wet:
1. A Period Piece
2. A K(C)ate (Winslet or Blanchett)
3. Nazis
4. A Fiennes Brother
Going down this check list for The Reader
1. Spans from '58-'95
2. Kate Winslet
3. At least 6 Nazis
4. Ralph Fiennes (the Fienner of the two, if you will)
Before this was released you had to assume minimum 3 - maximum 7 Oscar Nods coming for this movie. Ends up it got 5, so right where we'd assume, now saying that this is a movie the Academy would love usually puts the casually movie goer to sleep - but I'll say this, I loved it too.
The movie starts with the early relationship between Hanna (Winslet) and 15 year-old Michael (the phenomenal David Kross - where's his Nod?) and their sexual escapades. The first 45 minutes of this movie no one is really clothed. I actually had to look at my watch to make sure that it was in fact 4 o'clock in the afternoon and I was in a movie theatre, not 11 at night at home watching Cinemax. I lost count after the 213,845 time I saw at least one of Kate Winslet's nipples... not to mention some solid male full frontal thrown in there too. They have sex, then Michael reads to her, and this goes on for a few months until Hanna is promoted and has to move - leaving Michael abruptly.
We next find Michael and Hanna together, but this time in a courtroom. Michael as a young law student and Hannah as an Ex-Nazi on trial. This is where the film really gains it's legs and starts to ask the moral questions that are really at it's core. Hanna's shameful secrets become obvious during the trial, Michael knows that secret - that although do not atone for what she's done - will definitely affect the sentencing... yet remains silent. She hurt him, he hurt her. The characters also from here on gain a real depth and you start to really feel for both of them.
Although many of the reviews I've read have called this just another 'Holocaust Movie' (which it's not), or just 'Soft-Core Pornography Disguised as a Sermon' (which is also not true). It's a movie about people, whether it's a middle aged bus worker with a shameful secret and even darker past, or a lonely shut off lawyer scorned by a woman while in his teens. This is a movie about morals and the way humans interact and affect the lives of each other... plus Kate Winslet gets naked a bunch of times.
The Reader - 4/5 Stars

Shorter (and differing opinion) Review at http://www.yerboyjohnnycastle.blogspot.com

Movie Critic: Vicky Cristina Barcelona

I'll say it right now -
I'm a 23 year-old heterosexual male that loves Woody Allen movies.
There, now that that is out of the way - since 1992 he's put out horse shit. But I think he may be back to his old form here. The movie has a great setting - Barcelona - and a great cast - Rebecca Hall (Vicky), Scarlett Johansson (Cristina... clever title eh?) - and Javier Bardem (who I'm pretty sure sweats testosterone). The first thing that lured me into this film was the promise of a scene in which Scarlett Johansson and Penelope Cruz make-out... to be frank, I'd watch a movie where Margaret Cho and Bea Arthur make-out if I someone told me, '... well, you won't hate it.' It reminded me of my week in Barcelona... except with more 3 somes... and the inclusion of sex in general. It was actually kind of interesting hearing the normal 'Woody Neurotic Dialogue' from someone else - in this case Rebecca Hall (who along with Bardem are fantastic in this movie). It suffers from uneven pacing and starts falls apart with an ending that just left me feeling unsatisfied (typical Scar-Jo).
Vicky Cristina Barcelona - 3/5 Stars